Gardner Aimee K, Kosemund Matthew, Hogg Deborah, Heymann Abraham, Martinez Joseph
University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center, Dallas, TX, United States.
University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center, Dallas, TX, United States.
Am J Surg. 2017 Feb;213(2):249-252. doi: 10.1016/j.amjsurg.2016.09.040. Epub 2016 Oct 8.
The role of goal setting within post-simulation debriefing is not well known. This study sought to examine how inclusion of group-level goals, individual-level goals, or no goals in the debriefing process impacts teamwork.
Students participated in two high-fidelity team training scenarios. Between scenarios, teams were assigned to one of three debriefing groups: jointly creating five teamwork goals for the group to achieve (group-level goals); independently creating five teamwork goals for each individual to attain (individual-level goals); or no goals. Paired-samples t tests and one-way ANOVA with post-hoc Tukey tests were used to examine performance improvements and differences between groups.
86 MS3s participated in the training program across 22 groups. Percentage of items achieved on the teamwork tool from first to second scenario were 61.7±20.4 to 60.2±8.8 (no goals; ns), 59.8±14.0 to 76.8±7.0 (individual goals; p<0.01), and 62.5±9.5 to 67.0±10.0 (group goals; ns). Performance improvement in the individual goals group was significantly higher than the no goals group (p<0.05).
Debriefing facilitators should encourage learners to focus on creating and achieving personal goals contributing to teamwork.
模拟后汇报中目标设定的作用尚不为人所知。本研究旨在探讨在汇报过程中纳入团队层面目标、个人层面目标或不设目标如何影响团队合作。
学生参与了两个高保真团队训练场景。在两个场景之间，团队被分配到三个汇报组之一：共同制定五个团队要实现的团队合作目标（团队层面目标）；为每个个体独立制定五个要达成的团队合作目标（个人层面目标）；或不设目标。使用配对样本t检验和带有事后Tukey检验的单因素方差分析来检验绩效提升以及组间差异。
86名三年级医学生参与了跨22个组的培训项目。从第一个场景到第二个场景，团队合作工具上达成项目的百分比分别为61.7±20. 4至60.2±8.8（无目标；无显著差异）、59.8±14.0至76.8±7.0（个人目标；p<0.01）、以及62.5±9.5至67.0±10.0（团队目标；无显著差异）。个人目标组的绩效提升显著高于无目标组（p<0.05）。
汇报引导者应鼓励学习者专注于制定和实现有助于团队合作的个人目标。
